I write this blog in preparation for a Pennsylvania Nursing Board ordered Mental and Physical Examination (“MPE”) of a client. It is startling the number of these board ordered evaluations or PHMP/PHP/PNAP assessments due to some type of licensee criminal conduct. The heightened disciplinary activity among all boards reveals a much stricter atmosphere of licensee disciplinary enforcement. Why?

Pennsylvania’s heightened disciplinary environment is based upon a single legislative occurrence and a single judicial decision. Legislatively, passage of Pennsylvania’s medical marijuana regulatory scheme has prompted a review of all licensing laws in anticipation of increased licensee impairment and criminal activity due to marijuana usage (legal or not).

A prime example of this is Senate Bill 354 of 2017. I wrote about this bill last week. This bill seeks to compel any licensee charged with a crime (not convicted) to report such to their respective licensing board within 30 days of arrest. Failure to report will constitute a separate basis for discipline. This Bill seeks to bring the boards’ immediate knowledge of licensee’s criminal conduct so discipline can commence sooner.

Pennsylvania’s licensing boards subscribe to JNET – Pennsylvania’ criminal fingerprint data base. The Boards already know of licensee’s criminal charges of which they already expect them to report upon conviction. However, the Boards now want quicker reporting, with an additional and stronger basis for discipline. False reporting and failing to report criminal conduct!!

But this bill is not not law. So what’s the juice? The juice is that current licensee’s facing disciplinary action for some really minor issues will think twice before smoking pot; they will tell their friends and co-workers to think twice before smoking pot and taking care of the public. The health related boards are gearing up prosecutors for stricter supervision of all licensees. In this conservative jurisdiction, pot is thought to be a gateway drug to heroin. The prescription based opiate epidemic caught the health related boards with their pants down. It will not happen again with the passage of medical marijuana.

The enforcement environment also extends to potential licensees enrolled in any health related school who apply for licensure with a criminal history of one or two DUI’s. I represent many individuals whose licensure applications have been stalled based upon conditional denials and compelled PHMP enrollment. A new regulation requiring license applicants to be licensed within 12 months of taking their board examinations aides the Board in weeding out potential applicants who do not accept PHMP enrollment.

DO NOT go willy-nilly to the PHP/PHMP assessment and or evaluation with the expectation that you will pass and be given your license. DO NOT answer the personal data sheet with out consulting an attorney. DO NOT talk to the PHMP intake or assessors without attorney preparation. They write everything down — your story of depression, injured or dead family members, your divorce, your child abuse history. The PHMP people will always recommend enrollment in the VRP after you, the new licensee, admit your mental health treatment, drug use, and inability to practice safely. How can you admit you can not practice safely if you have never practiced? Applicants fighting their cases must be patient and call me ASAP.

The Birchfield decision (written about in other blogs) is the judicial decision most affecting disciplinary actions. Birchfield focused on the admissibility of blood alcohol levels as a result of a non-consensual blood draw in a DUI investigation. This case has rippled through every Pennsylvania county’s drunk driving enforcement efforts. Birchfield ruled inadmissible DUI blood evidence that revealed drugs (illegal or prescription) and/or marijuana use.

Birchfield rendered blood drug use evidence an inappropriate basis for licensee disciplinary action. The heightened reporting responsibilities of nurses (30 days from arrest), allow petitions for mental and physical evaluations based upon affidavits of probable cause reflecting alcohol or drug use even though blood evidence is not admissible in a court of law. The Boards want to know right away what its licensees are smoking or drugs they are ingesting.

Pennsylvania licensees need to fight every criminal case. The new notice provisions in Bill 354 will become law. While criminal charges are pending licensees will have to provide a potentially incriminating personal statement to a licensing board. This is crazy. There is no 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination in a professional license defense. Licensees need an attorney to help draft counseled answers to strategic legal questions and statements under these circumstances. Now, more than any time in the recent past, licensees should utilize counsel to properly protect their license.

The Boards use their experts to determine impairment. Why shouldn’t you use your expert to protect your license? Licensees face workplace challenges, complex life issues, and now a crazy enforcement environment in Pennsylvania. Mail from the PHMP, PHP, and PNAP present multi- faceted traps for even the most experienced licensees. Licensee need their own expert — an experienced criminal and administrative law attorney to effectively protect their license. Call me to discuss your criminal or license case.